Posted
by
timothyon Sunday December 22, 2013 @05:08AM
from the but-they-were-so-polite-about-it dept.

Walking The Walk writes "Canada's spy agency deliberately withheld information from the courts in an effort to do an end-run around the law when it applied for top-secret warrants to intercept the communications of Canadians abroad, a Federal Court judge said Friday. CSIS assured Judge Richard Mosley the intercepts would be carried out from inside Canada, and controlled by Canadian government personnel, court records show. However, Canadian officials then asked for intercept help from foreign intelligence allies without telling the court. 'It is clear that the exercise of the court's warrant issuing has been used as protective cover for activities that it has not authorized,' Mosley wrote in redacted reasons."

Notes? We have even fewer laws controlling CSIS than the US has controlling the NSA. Not that either agency believes they are much more than suggestions or guidelines and not actual hard and fast rules.

Fortunately lying to a court is a criminal offence, typically called perjury. If officers of the court lie to it, as appears to be the case, they can at the very least be disbarred, if not imprisoned for contempt.

The guilty parties, of course, will be posting everywhere saying you can't do anything about it, to avoid a ground-swell of opinion that would force the Crown Attorneys to lay charges.

Also expect the miscreants to be writing learned opinions saying that the courts should defer to the security

FISA judge is told by NSA that they have repeatedly violated his warrants for years. He's mad. And he does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT IT, other than write a report about how they aren't listening to him.

Unless there is some actual penalty that is applied when the law isn't followed, there is no point to having the law. And right now, the three grou

Of course they lied to Congress but this thread is about lieing to the courts which the American agencies probably also do just as our government would lie about spying to Parliament.It is the job of the courts to stop the government, including their four letter agencies, from interfering with our constitutional rights and our Supreme Court has interpreted our right to unreasonable searches as a right to privacy.ps, it breaks the flow when you have your post split between the subject and body.

So, I see the Canadians are taking notes from the Americans and the British.

Hardly. It was exactly this type of abuse back in the 80's(1984 actually), when the RCMP was responsible for national security that caused the mandate to be ripped away from the RCMP, and the creation of CSIS with...a civilian oversight board. Very nasty bit of history with the entire organization on that. The real question of course is, why didn't the board do anything, say anything, or check this. The other part is, this will end up before the senate, and a house committee, both of which are good. Ma

So, I see the Canadians are taking notes from the Americans and the British.

The Harper Conservative government walks over and steps on the Canadians rights to privacy and to reasonable justice. The Conservatives have one god, called money / business. They have been gradually destroying the social safety net of Canadians and the indigionous peoples.

We are waiting for a re-election, and hopefully, we can dump the conservatives and their xxx licking policies.

I've been ranting about "bi-lateral security agreements" as a means to do an end-run around the bans on spying on citizens/locally that each nation has. This is just proof that such is exactly what the countries are all doing.

Coming soon to the silver screen: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2335888/ [imdb.com]. Pretty good timing if you ask me. This is off-topic, but I'm looking forward too se how much blatant product placement they can manage in this instalment. Hamilton 2 was almost ridiculous when they had a Microsoft roll-up [feber.se] randomly placed in a Lebanese airport.

And as usual no individuals will be held personally accountable for this. Perhaps a general censure will occur, or a mocking speech stating that they didn't do anything wrong thinly veiled as an apology.

Canadians often mock America but it seems that you guys have achieved banana republic status too.

In cases like this, the miscreants will want you to express exactly that opinion, to avoid a ground-swell of opinion that will force the Crown to lay charges. I recommend you write your local newspaper to ask for their heads on a pike!

And as usual no individuals will be held personally accountable for this. Perhaps a general censure will occur, or a mocking speech stating that they didn't do anything wrong thinly veiled as an apology.

Canadians often mock America but it seems that you guys have achieved banana republic status too.

What we have seen for the last couple of months is avoidance, avoidance and spiting on national laws.It's time for those people knowingly engaging in criminal behavior to face charges. If we not react now, they will feel more and more powerful.

Innocent we are not, but we do still respect the rule of law. The courts are also somewhat vindictive when they are screwed around with - I'd expect the bar just got raised for any future warrants CSIS wants.

Not in Canada but three or four terms is about the limit before people get tired of any politician. Moreover, I don't think much of 'Harper-ism' will survive Harper. Too much of his 'reforms' are based upon running the entire government off his desk.For example, not letting government scientists talk to the press unless the PMO understands what is being said, i.e.. nothing. Statistics Canada now actually appends footnotes saying that their work cannot be trusted because the statistical samples are now too small or otherwise do not meet best practices.

Moreover, Conservative judges have a way of ruling more for individual liberty than institutional liberties once they are ruling at lofty Olympian levels of the Supreme Court. Politicians keep being surprised by this.

No such thing in Canada, at least on the federal level. The House of Commons has to stand for election at least once every 5 years (an election is typically called after about 4 years under majorities), but there's no legal limit on how long someone can stay in an MP's seat or the PM's office.

Also, Harper only first formed government in 2006 (minority), with reelections in 2008 (minority again) and 2011 (the current majority government). It have to be a pretty short term limit to kick in already.

I'm pretty sure the spooks in question were very polite when they cut into a conversation and said "Pardon my interruption, but could you please repeat what you just said? The tape didn't catch that. Thank you!"

Politicians are egomaniacs and love the prestige of being invited into 'the great game'. So, we can't put our faith in them to encourage a reasonable balance between the necessary and important work that intelligence agencies must do and civil liberties that are necessary for the wee project we call western civilization.

Judges reallly. really really hate being lied to. They're confronted with people who will do nearly anything to stay out of jail or avoid paying fines so they have to assume that someone is bending the truth a bit in court. But bending the truth a lot is the sort of thing they have all sorts of powers to dissuade. Now, the Crown may never lay charges but that's a separate issue. Rulings of all kinds can rattle up the ladder and cause no end of unintentional activities.